A family in the woods, their children taken to a community: the Palmoli case divides Italy between educational freedom and children's rights.

The story of the "family living in the woods" has become one of the most talked-about cases in Italy in just a few weeks. The protagonists are Catherine Birmingham and Nathan Trevallion, an Anglo-Australian couple who chose to move into a farmhouse nestled in the woods of Palmoli, in the Chieti hinterland. They live with three children—an eight-year-old girl and six-year-old twins—who grew up without electricity, running water, or gas, far from the daily grind of urban life.
Theirs is a radical lifestyle choice, driven by a desire to distance themselves from modernity and offer their children a childhood immersed in nature. For education, the parents opted for homeschooling, with the support of a private tutor. A choice that many consider legitimate and appealing, but one that attracted the authorities' attention after a health crisis.

The case arose from mushroom poisoning

The case stems from a hospitalization in April due to mushroom food poisoning. At that time, health workers noted the unusual living situation and reported the case to social workers, as required by law. Subsequent checks by the Carabinieri revealed the lack of a bathroom, water, electricity, and gas, the presence of a caravan as part of the living area, and the fact that the children did not attend a traditional school.

The L'Aquila Juvenile Prosecutor's Office opened a case that initially led to the suspension of parental rights, but without removing the children. Over time, however, the judges reached a much harsher decision, sparking a media and political storm.

The Court's intervention and a rainy evening

The Juvenile Court of L'Aquila ordered the three children to be removed from custody and transferred to a foster home in the Vasto area. Their mother will be able to stay with them for the entire observation period, thanks to lengthy negotiations with lawyer Giovanni Angelucci.

The scene of the execution is intense and tense: it's evening, it's raining, and the Carabinieri, social workers, the mayor, the guardian of minors, and the lawyer arrive in front of the farmhouse. The area is cordoned off. A neighbor reports seeing the children packing a backpack containing pajamas, a toothbrush, and a piece of fruit.

The father follows the convoy, but remains outside the building, unable to spend the night with his children. That night, he says, is "terrible": the farmhouse is empty, the family is divided, and the feeling is one of sudden and unjust trauma.

The Court's reasons: not just education

The Court's decision is not based solely on the evidence. The ruling clearly states that the greatest risk concerns violation of the right to social life, guaranteed by Article 2 of the Constitution.

According to the judges, the children live in isolation that prevents them from interacting with their peers, an essential element for psychological and social development, thus producing "serious psychological and educational consequences."

Added to this are the living conditions: the house is uninhabitable, lacking structural safety, compliant systems, and minimal hygiene and health conditions.

There's also a modern and unprecedented challenge: the media exposure of the children. The judges believe the family has released images and data that make the minors identifiable, compromising their protection.

The defense: "The decision is full of falsehoods, we will appeal."

The family's lawyer, Giovanni Angelucci, strongly contests the order, calling it "false." He argues that the documentation relating to homeschooling exists and is registered, and that the court ignored key elements.

According to the defense, the family never put the children at risk: on the contrary, they raised them with love and care, in nature, offering them rich and healthy experiences. For this reason, an appeal has already been filed: the parents have ten days to appeal the decision.

The father's voice: "They're destroying our lives."

Nathan Trevallion recounts his story with great pain. He says that the state's intervention "destroyed the lives of five people," that the children were traumatized, and that there was no reason to take them away from a home where—according to him—they were happy.

The father describes the following hours as a whirlwind of anguish: alone in the woods, with the animals and the silence, waiting to see his wife and children. He says he will continue to fight so that the family can live together again in their home.

Political intervention and national controversy

The media hype intensifies when Matteo Salvini intervenes, calling the state's behavior "shameful." On the radio and social media, the deputy prime minister maintains that the family has done nothing wrong and that the state cannot "steal children" from two parents just because they live without water and electricity.

Salvini adds an explosive comparison: to the Roma camps in Giugliano, where—he claims—he saw children unschooled, dirty, and without essential services, and asks why the state is absent in those settings. The League announces an urgent inquiry.

The online mobilization: "Hands off the family living in the woods!"

Meanwhile, a massive online mobilization has begun. An online petition has surpassed 30 signatures in just a few days, describing the family as victims of an unjust system and calling for them to remain united in their house in the woods.

The signatories speak of loving parents, conscious choice, and a state that oppresses the freedom to raise children and live as one wishes. On the other hand, many users and commentators point out that parents' freedom cannot override children's rights to safety, health, hygiene, social interaction, and education.

A story still open, full of difficult questions

The story isn't over. The appeal will be reviewed, social services will continue to monitor the family, and the foster care community will host the children and their mother for weeks or months. The father remains in the woods, in the now-empty house, awaiting further developments.

The story of the family in the woods has become a reflection of our times: a country divided between those who fear state interference in family decisions and those who defend children's right to protection, even when their parents have the best intentions. A case that will continue to be debated and, for many, remains far from a definitive solution.